Skip to main content

About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 94 (some duplicates have been removed)
a quick summary of the laws. the ada, calif. building code, the civil rights, and our experts here will elaborate. we also have a list of certified caps at work in san francisco for you. carla johnson with the mayor's office of disability has created a really good it died of out to interview your experts to make sure you are getting the best quality product for you. been next -- the money you pay for the inspection you can take as a tax deduction. any money that if you have taken can be applied as a tax deduction. this can be done on an annual basis. next, the opportunity, and a fund -- opportunity loan fund, providing for small businesses to pay for the inspection or to make improvements needed. to do it before you receive the lawsuit. and lastly, we of the bar association and their resources. they're providing their legal service for you. this last thing i am going to share with you in terms of what we have seen in our office is that with the individuals, that does not necessarily mean an individual will follow up with a lawsuit. what we've seen in our office is the individual's
the uc davis school of law in 2004, following a clerkship with judge cal braise of the united states court of appeals for the second circuit. interest include election law, administrative law, statutory interpretation, constitutional law and property and natural resources law. he is a resident of san francisco's mission district. we are honored to work chris almendorf. [ applause ] >> thank you very much and thank you to all of the candidates who are here today. we're very fortunate to be joined by six candidates and what i hope will soon be seven. all of the candidates have agreed to ask their supporters to be respectful of other candidates and the audience and to maintain quiet during the forum. i ask you to respect that commitment. every aspect of this forum will be equally fair to all participating candidates. as everyone here knows candidate debates are often limited to latitudinal appears and personal attack. our debate focuses on critical areas of policy disagreement among the leading candidates. so this end the league of women voters of san francisco and the san francisco pu
that the law would recognize. so the law all of the time develops concepts that scientists are interested in studying. it might be competency, for example. well, competency is really a multifaceted construct from a legal perspective. it could be competency to be executed, it could be competency to commit a crime. it could be competency to contribute to the decision as to whether voluntarily commit yourself to a mental hospital. it could be competency to participate in an abortion decision. so competency means many different things. the first thing you have to do as a scientist is ask the question, well, what does the law mean by it because if you want me to measure it, i have to somehow apply it. so going back to the question of free will, because a scientist can't operationally define it, they can't measure it, they're not really that much use to legal debates about free will. now, what does it mean on the legal side? i actually think the idea of free will or what is often referred to as volitional control plays a very big part in legal systems, but i think in the legal systems, we don't
identifying ways our ethic laws could be strengthened. as supervisors, what if anything would you propose to strength the city's ethics laws. i will start with mr. davis. >> strong ethic laws are essential. what is happening with our sunshine task force and hope davis can speak to this since she recently served on the task force. these need to be strengthened and one problem we have is around enforcement. i would like to see more of the ethical violations of larger committees, some of which are operating, for instance, in some shady areas of law. one was the run he ed run, the committee for mayor ed lee last year and the campaigns that aren't swaying the politics of city, the way the run ed run campaign did. so i think that is one the issues and improving our good government and ethic laws in san francisco. >> miss breed, would you like to address the question? do you want me to repeat it? >> yes. >> sure. a recent chief civil grand jury report, at the request of supervisor campos the city conducted a comparison of laws identifying ways our ethic laws could be strengthened. as su
is an automoton, usually you can. the law has a bright line. it says if you engage in a wongful action, there is a defense called the insanity defense which never works as most of us know because we don't recognize it. should we recognize it, that's an interesting question. should we have a more robust concept of diminished responsibility in light of the understanding that some people have less control over their preferences and desires or should we have better sentencing schemes or get rid of incarceration and come up with different models of trying to deal with punishment once we understand people have wrong selections. i think those are all interesting questions, but is there free will? well, the fact that almost everybody in the audience raised either their right or left hand contemplated it and were quickly able to act and respond. that to me says, yes, there is. now what do we want to do about it? now that we understand that those of us in the audience or up here that like chocolate cake may not have control over it, how do we want to account for that if at all in the criminal ju
jurisdictions as you know, that's not true. after hanky was acquitted under the american law institute test because he could not control his behavior, congress in most state jurisdictions changed the law, got rid of the lack of emotional test, the a.l.i. test and now in most jurisdictions, the nontest requires that you demonstrate that you can't distinguish right from wrong. so now we have, and again, the law uses science for the law's own purposes, but what is problematic here is the disconnect. from the criminal side, if you lack emotional control, you go to prison because you can't win under the test because the test doesn't apply. when you walk out of prison and you lack emotional control, you get civilly committed. so what we have is a fundamental disconnect between how we view philosophy of free will and human control on the criminal side versus the civil side and not surprisingly on both sides "the state wins" because on the criminal side you go to prison and on the civil side, you get incarcerated civilly. >> i don't think that's much of a disconnect. i think -- so i agree with you
, to say that he's been law enforcement for 30 years and bring back 30-year experience to this consideration of this bill, and he said this bill makes sense because drug treatment works and this is in spite of the fact we'll be battling the district attorneys along with many other arms of public safety. [laughter] >> we've got the data, we've got the facts and we know this will provide great benefit to our communities, to our neighborhoods, and to all of california. thank you for your support. [applause] >> tal, i want to go back to the question that marty posed earlier, which is in effect this idea that in order to incentivize people making the decision to seek treatment that the fear of a felony conviction or possible state prison sentence could play a positive role. you talk to a lot of people charged with crimes who are trying to make the decision of what decision to make, what is the primary motivation you see coming from them. how do they decision make on dispositions related to drug possession as a felony? >> i think that for a lot of people it does have to be a
a debate about a proposed law that would reduce felony drug possession crimes to a misdemeanor. this is what 13 states have done. we not only bring these issues to the forefront, but have the opportunity to participate -- and we have cards that you could fill out and questions. this promises to be a year of reform and change like we have never seen, and we now see prisoner reentry programs being implemented. we're still spending too much money and resources and not enough on rehabilitation and reentry. this november, the voters will decide on limiting the three strikes law. issues and measures long overdue. it is clear there is much more that needs to be done. according to a study that was published this month -- since 1989, 2000 people have been wrongfully incarcerated and they served collectively, 10,000 years. an average of 11 years person. i would like to thank the people who made this summit possible. memoranda -- amy devon -- many volunteers and all of our speakers and panelists. i would like to thank the co- sponsors, and the bar association of san francisco. i would lik
't disclose to me they wanted to demolish my apartment and which is a violation of the law and with sunshine i began to research and research and now i have 43 pounds of paper in the research and because my case, sunshine case, that found supervisors wiener, colen, chiu and mar and they broke the state law and that is why this case is in court. they shut down sunshine and the retaliation was so strong i was evicted from my home and because i was raised right i would do it over again, and once i am elected one of the law enforcement officials will swear me in. >> i am mr. garcia and have the diseepest experience of anyone. i have many years and seven years as an educators and taught there and president of board of ethics and board of appeals and 25 years of experience in doing service to the neighborhood. i am supported by the incumbent and scott wiener and others and i want very bad to be your supervisor and i am asking for your support and there's give me your vote on november 6. thank you. >> hi. i am joel io and i am running for supervisor and they have a way of looking at the happy m
or someone else for 72 hours. we need to enact laura's law and mr. dufty is working on that and finding housing for these individuals but not to keep going back to the economy but one solution is improve the economy so we can improve these people's lives. thank you. >> thank you. >> l the homeless problem it's very, very interesting because you know some cities don't -- i think one of the reasons we do have a problem is because of the wonderful social services that we have here in this city and unfortunately as someone who has sat on several committees it's disheartening that just across the east bay, even if you go to oakland, it changes drastically and i think it's one of the reasons people come to san francisco. do they all live here? absolutely not. and i think we have to get tough with this issue and the housing authority truly needs some restructuring, so that they can do their mandate which is to house people because that's another issue, but there is money missing there, so i think we have to be tough with that and it's like tough love but because we do care and it's going ha
person standing beside and behind the law of our communities, love this city. they would not be here unless they did, from the labor groups to become -- clergy groups to the community-based agencies, they really have a deep, deep love. i know it, and i know we have had these very sensitive discussions about these programs will have been done in other parts of the country, and i had a chance to review those. in agreement with our local leaders, in total agreement with the community-based agencies and civil rights organizations that have had a very delivered reason to engage me on this, we will not be implementing the stop and frisk programs or variations of that here in san francisco. [applause] we do not wish to be distracted from the real reason we are here. we love our kids. we love our families in the bayview whether they are in sunnyvale or alice griffith or potrero hill or in the mission. we love them so much that we have to do more to care for them. we have to find those connections. [applause] there are too many stories that we are hearing from our clergy when it is too late.
forum including the university of california-san francisco, hastings college of law, [wo-uflt/] and our media partner sfgtv. we're fortunate to have such an impressive field of candidates. i will begin with the questions. the first question is for miss breed. mr. davis, and mr. resignato. and for the benefit of the audience, i will also project the questions on the screen. please explain your position on whether or under what conditions the san francisco parks and recreation department should be parented to lease park facilitis to food vendors and other commercial enterprises? miss breed? >> hi. london breed. i think that what we see now in the recreation -- i'm sorry, what is the time limit on each of these questions? >> one minute, please. >> i think what we see now is a bit of an abuse in terms of the number of vendors that the city has leased space to in our parks. and parks and recreation is for parks and recreation and not necessarily should be a place where we are leasing space to more vendors than we particularly need in specific areas. there is a place for vendors, for foo
will meet up. we may skirt the law and serve something before 6:00 a.m. the bookmobile, where are they? >> i have my cheat sheet here which i cannot find. the library has been here after great disasters. there has -- is a special book that won an award this year. here is the book. i downloaded it on my kindle. it can check out copies of the book mobile. nex>> thanks for being here. start walking slowly. welcome to san francisco, everyone. ♪
with law enforcement and the community, we need to merge. you need to collaborate. you cannot speak to one another, you need to talk together. this is the challenge. i want to urge everyone in the audience, i take strength from those words, from that question as bobby threw down the gauntlet 30 years ago. you said you would always be there for me. meaning, the there in force, together with the understanding. thank you very much. >> let me begin this the scutcheon. you work every day with gang members. you were once a gang member yourself. why do you think you are effective working with young people and what does this mean to you and how we know that this is working. first of all, i want to thank god for his grace. i work with united players. i do reentry and the youth involved in juvenile delinquency. the majority of the kids i work with our gang members. i was formally -- formerly a gang member who grew up in san francisco. we all have stories of guys involved with the gang. everyone has a different story of why they joined. my thing is, i believe it works for me to be involved wit
is that there is not an answer. you have brought about by bringing this conversation forum. it is not just law enforcement perspective, it is not just the community-based perspective, it is not just the research perspective, it is a multi- layered approach. first and foremost, we do have to consider meeting youth where they are act. we are talking about perpetrators of violence or what not or system involved or involved in gangs, we have to meet them where they are at. pain and hurt produces more hurt, right? what is fundamental it is addressing back pain -- addressing that pain. not looking at folks in a punitive way and saying, this guy is notorious, we have to lock him up. that person is hurting. he might have been abused, you know. first and foremost, we need to meet that individual's needs. i am pursuing a master's in social work. i have that lens. we need to heal our communities and take those answers upon ourselves. everybody has already -- we sure this in perspective, but definitely, we need to create community anchored solutions. that involves a discourse with policy makers. as people of color, w
have an inspection by an architect who is familiar with ada issues. we call all of these laws ada, but really ada is one aspect of the federal laws. there are five or six statutes, depending on the specifics of the case. there are a series of overlapping laws, all of which require essentially the same thing. did different measures of damages and other things. the lawyers will sue you on these various labels. they all really say the same thing. the purpose of that letter is to establish damages. the first thing to do when you get that letter is to have your place it inspected. if you have done so, let the person know that you have had the place inspected. that makes the case go away. certainly, it lessens the likelihood you were going to be sued. if you need more time, talk to the tenants or talk to the person suing you, sending you the letter. get some additional time. they do not have elyria. what you need to do is find out what your rights are, and if you need to make repairs or remediations, do it because you are going to have to do it sometime during the course of litigation i
of supervisors is very important to us. they make laws that we have to follow. it gives me great pleasure to introduce the president of the board of supervisors, david chiu. [applause] >> good afternoon. first, if any of you have ever wondered what an ls -- and elected officials sounds like with anesthesia and his mouth, i want to let you know that i got out of a dental chair 20 minutes ago after a few hours of dentists work. but i wanted to give a few remarks of how i think we are doing. i'm very much more are optimistic about how we're doing than four years ago. i read an article from the chronicle and it said that the candidates disagreed on everything, except for the need to crack down on entertainment violence. i did not propose anything for the first six months until there were half a dozen people affected. that was followed by a terrific shooting, which was then followed by an incident in union square. i want to take a moment and thank the san francisco police department for your input. if we pass legislation to require additional security requirements and plans. we pass legislatio
the license transfer to them should the modifications be declined. some of these laws on the books a little archaic, and i will give you an example. we now have live entertainment in san francisco, which allows amplified music until 10:00 p.m. if the conditions has no entertainment, and the entertainment, it also includes this limited live provision. we have determined in the city that this legislation is good -- good legislation. there's no conditional use requirement to have this. a lot of people today want to have food, drink, and be able to have some music. how can we get the limited live entertainment excluded from the know amplified or no live entertainment excluded on the transfers? >> that is going to mostly driven locally. most of the conditions you'll ever see on an abc license are because we rely, to a great extent, on the police department and local officials to determine what is best for their communities. i'm not trying to pin this on you guys or blame you guys, but we do try to work with you. we do not tend to want to overrule the police department very often. now that said,
a law passed in california that is continuing to go to new states. we are excited about that. we're launching more cities. you will see this in more areas. the neat part about what happens with get around is it is building a community. people know who they live next to each other and can help each other out. that is a common theme we have heard. we're also helping the environment because it takes cars off the road. less people have to own cars. never having owned a car, i think that is a good thing. it helps me live a healthier lifestyle. i am excited to be on the panel. >> thanks, jessica. i was putting together a presentation recently with the logos of companies in the sharing economy on the map near our office at eco dash working place --at a coworking place. i counted 20 share economy places in my neighborhood. there are new companies launched every week. this is just a small sample, some the leaders in san francisco. jay, give us some background on the sharing economy working group and how you think it benefits san francisco, including underserved communities. >> it is histo
be to make compliance with existing laws and regulations more clear and more easy for local residents. london, for example, is doing a great job of this in anticipation of the olympics. they have run out of hotel rooms, and they realize that the whole purpose of the olympics was to create economic development in some of the most underserved areas of the city, and they are not getting that. we will be working collaborative lee to come up with a solution to solve that problem. they have created a wonderful website that clearly states what you need to do to be compliant. >> that is what christopher is doing in london then, right? >> yes. >> one more question for jay, and i think we should open up for questions from everyone here. tell us what existing city initiatives -- you know, this -- the schering economy working group will interface with or connect with, and how does it fit in with existing strategic goals and plans of the city? >> i think our director of environment in our city has issued a goal for 2020, being mission -- emission free, carbon neutral. that is something that when you think
as a community service, i host a radio and tv program called "folk law for ordinary folk," it's a very tough one in the sense that workers at some point are essentially giving up higher salary and higher pay in exchange for those pension benefits. so to come back later on and essentially cut that out from under them, the question is one of fairness and of equity. that being said, as far as police and firefighters, obviously those are public safety areas and it's a little bit different in the sense that we definitely need to protect those pensions in a different manner than we do others. as far as other ways to save, i would certainly look at capping pensions moving forward, so that they don't increase incrementally over time. i think we need to put a cap on that now before it starts to burgeon and get out of control. >> thank you. >> miss olague. >> i believe i was one of the individuals who answered no. i don't think we should balance the budget on the back of the workforce, and there was prop c. prop b was the adachi measure and proper c was a lot of pension reform where the unions and the
areas where it got out of sync with current law. one thing i know that has dragged on. i wanted to get it back before i left office. what you, what was distributed to you, we are not going to act on today. there's a requirement two week's notice before any change. this will come back at our next meeting for action. the changes in the red line strike out copy you have, so it takes the order of business and amends it to our current order business. one place where it has substance to it is the amount of notice we give for water rate changes. it actually shortens the time in the process making it winter with the board of supervisors policy. if we wanted to retain the older, longer time line, we certainly could choose to do that. couple comments. one of the reasons this hasn't come back sooner is because i haven't, just in being chair, i haven't noticed anything that wasn't there that i wished was. i don't think there needs to be something that needs to be fixed. our rules of order of very brief. they do not reference and are no bound by robert shules of order, you have a motion and a secon
" is manifested through the media, and law enforcement for numbers. it was more of a community. i did not go to school and meet somebody. i lived on this block and this is where my grandmother's house was, or i was born and raised. what people may see on tv was at my front door. the killing and the dope dealing. it was right there. this was a community list of people, we just grew up together. there were no handouts and no one told us how to conduct ourselves. and tell us what to wear. someone could have a school fight, and we may be at the mall, and see the person we have a fight with. the army and navy have their bar fights. i did not see this as being a game, or a community. supporting each other, this may have been in a negative way. i did not have a stable household. many of them do not of their fathers are, where their father is dead. in their return, the block i gave up -- this is who i looked up to. he had a notorious reputation. there was the violence and in return, we had the pros and cons for that. a lot of people would mess with me because of who my father was -- to my brother wa
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 94 (some duplicates have been removed)